Share This Page

Monongahela mayor charged with theft by deception over loan

| Tuesday, Dec. 11, 2012, 4:22 p.m.
Mugshot of Monongahela Mayor Robert Kepics, who was arrested for theft by deception-false impression. Tuesday, December 11, 2012.

The Monongahela mayor, who was arrested on Tuesday on a charge of theft by deception when a Washington County couple accused him of not repaying a loan of nearly $4,000, said he did not steal the money.

“I am not a thief,” said Robert Kepics, 56, who was taken to the Washington County Jail, then released when a bondsman posted bail. “I'm on disability. I only make $1,400 a month. I have been trying to pay back as much as I can.”

Kepics, a former Monongahela city councilman who was elected mayor in 2008, was charged after a New Eagle couple, John and Shirley Amon, filed a complaint with District Judge Mark Wilson in Monongahela that states that Kepics borrowed $3,935 from them on April 25, 2011.

The Amons said he repaid $1,400 seven months later, promising to get the rest soon. They said he agreed in July to try to repay $100 a month but has only made two payments, the last one in September.

Court papers show the charge was approved by the Washington County District Attorney's Office.

“I was making payments to these people. I have the receipts,” said Kepics, who called the Amons friends who lived in the same neighborhood where he was raised.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.